Comments on: Religious assemblies now OK with Seattle schools?

By: Jeffrey Overstreet

Jeffrey Overstreet — Mon, 21 Apr 2008 23:46:27 +0000

I applaud Jennifer Perrow’s objection. To *require* public schoolchildren to attend an assembly for a renowned religious leader, and *require* them to wear outfits with a religious symbol, is to require them to not only participate but to celebrate something that represents spiritual convictions they and their families may not embrace.

If it were merely to give them opportunity to encounter a famous international figure and hear a message of peace, that would be one thing. But the fact that Seattle Public Schools would almost definitely ban any formal activities in connection with the Pope’s visit shows the problem pretty vividly.

In a previous comment, “conviviality” writes, “The Dalai Lama is not just a religious figure but a political and global one.” The same is definitely true of the Pope.

Having said all that, I am very interested in interfaith dialogue, and would like nothing better than to see the Seattle Public Schools *expose* children to events where they learn about different religions… so long as there is fairness, and they are not coaxed to embrace any particular path.

Further, I believe there is *some* common ground between Christianity and Buddhism… a conviction that one of my favorite Christian writers, Thomas Merton, explored extensively and wrote about in Zen and the Birds of Appetite. And I hope to see more and more civil and friendly dialogue between adherents to both perspectives and paths.

Jeffrey

By: the17pointscale

the17pointscale — Mon, 21 Apr 2008 23:06:45 +0000

Hi, Jeffrey.

What is your perspective of this letter? I find it interesting, but I’m not quite sure how to react. But you tagged it “Seattle-brand stupidity,” so I’m curious whether you found the letter to be an absurd overreaction or an apt response to SPS hypocracy.

-Andrew

By: jenzug

jenzug — Sat, 19 Apr 2008 18:57:04 +0000

What a great letter! It respectfully takes the situation to its logical conclusion. It’s not a flaming letter, nor does it exaggerate. Many of us (ahem, me!) could learn to write such a letter when we feel called to confront. Thanks for sharing this.

By: sun60

sun60 — Thu, 17 Apr 2008 07:31:50 +0000

I actually drove by Key Arena that afternoon and saw dozens of Seattle Public School buses along with a sea of kids with their matching shirts on. Unbelievable - and confirmation of why our 5th grade daughter is enrolled in a private school.

By: conviviality

conviviality — Thu, 17 Apr 2008 05:32:54 +0000

I think a more equal comparison would be if Mother Teresa had come to Seattle and spoken at an event. I could imagine a broad range of people attending, regardless of religious background. I don’t think I can place James Dobson on the same plane as the Dalai Lama as a world figure. I think it was important those school kids went. The T-shirts were possibly a bit over the top…although, “His Holiness” seems to me as much a title as anything. Same with His Holiness the Pope.

The Dalai Lama is not just a religious figure but a political and global one.

By: coffeemonkey

coffeemonkey — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 20:22:11 +0000

I think we all know the kind of response there would be if these same kids were taken to an event where the main speaker was James Dobson (Focus on the Family). Parents would be up in arms. BUT, it is OK to attend an event with the Dalai Lama. I have a theory about why this is so. One religion is a “threat”, the other isn’t. I wonder why such a religion could be a threat. Could it be that there is some actual potency?

By: holymolyblog

holymolyblog — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 18:50:37 +0000

I think it all depends how the trip is framed. Are they attending as participants or observers? Surely, we want our kids to be religiously literate and have experiences that help them understand others’ belief systems.

Of greater concern to me: forcing children to attend a Dave Matthews concert. Is this not borderline abusive?